bumping this for Remove Rostov.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/37308078/Stuff/Rostov.rec
the map is fucking broken but it's still in the auto match queue. you took out Hill 331, which is shit but not broken, moscow winter, which i don't remember any major problems with, rzehv summer (problem?), and Rostov is still fucking here.
don't bother watching the replay unless you don't understand how the map works. |
one of the problems with demos right now is that even if you see them you can't reliably kill them without AT weapons and then you have to actually hit the tiny thing. you can't clear them with sweepers if the other player is paying attention and RG/grenades don't always pen. |
the thing is, non of the basic design choices for the factions (bar soviets imo), are bad. you can make a core infantry unit work, as long as that unit has lots of choices (bars/bazookas is not a lot and is gated behind fuel/mp and mun) and interesting support options (the support options either suck, don't synergies well, and are highly gated and separated into two groups, only one of which you'll get).
same thing with OKW, albeit more difficult. if trucks were not integrated into the tier system you could choose whether or not to be mobile or focus on an area. forcing all of the trucks to either be in the base sector or a single other sector would reduce the amount of area they can cover and make them more vulnerable to globals.
there are options, relic just isn't good at making the right choice and seems to actively not make changes people think of. |
AT gun camo really isn't bad but you don't need it most of the time. perhaps if it gave a first strike accuracy bonus it would be more useful.
and US tank crews can already repair criticals separately from health, it's the second repair ability. |
I see.. It must be my bad micro then because one on one I always lose the Stug AT nades and Zis-3 guns (with their insane range) make quick work of my Stugs even if I manage to back track skillfully and manage to keep facing the T-34..
Also Stug's range is usually limited to their sight and that is nothing compared to SU-85 (with focused sight and/or Zis-3 tracking ability)...
they are very much defensive vehicles. you cannot push with them and you can't really chase either; they're just AT guns with armour. with that said, a pair of stugs, particularly veted, or a stug pak or stug with grens screening the front is a serious threat for any medium tank. you are a bit on the back foot but that's to be expected, they cost less than a 34/76. their weapon is decent, they're just not very tough. they need to stay in the back with a screening force in front to sight for and protect them. |
i think aimtime would be better than reload. |
This new chair by relic has a huge amount of features; the seat and back are amazing.
no, you can't have arms, they're not needed, stop asking. |
i've thought some about the faction designs and come to the conclusion that all the factions are designed to function with 1/2 to 3/4 of their units. this causes problems.
in dow2 (i'm going to talk about it because the underlying mechanics are almost identical and it also used a tier system) 3 tiers with 3-4 units in each tier. these units were not identical between factions and not all factions had the same options but the cores units covered most things and the commanders and their globals mostly covered the small gaps left.
while there was ~~10 units available to each faction you were not expected to use every unit in a match. for one, games were smaller and 6 or 7 squads was the norm late game. additionally you didn't need, and couldn't afford, more than that. in coh2, the tier costs mean that generally no faction has all its units available. soviets can generally afford 2, OKH 1/2 & 3 or 4, and US and OKW can generally afford 2. OKW is the mostly likely to afford all 3 tiers but even then they don't generally utilize units from all.
since no units or roles are duplicated across tiers and not all tiers are available you end up having to decide both want you units you want the option to use and want units you want to actually build. this creates two places to make poor decisions. this is highly pronounced with the soviets who have no hard AT other than the weak t34 if they go t1/t3. the US has a similar issue if they do not get t2 and then for some reason cannot afford shermans or jacksons.
not only is a smaller number of units more boring but it results in predictable "safe builds" and creates balance problems when a player does not have a counter available. |
they're solid units. they're decent against t34 soviets and amazing against US until they get jacksons. they do fine against medium tanks as long as you protect them with paks or grens to prevent them from getting rushed and their range gives them room to safely fight enemy tanks. their AI is good enough to make them a problem for USF and the E hardcounters riflemen. i do wish they were still primarily AT though and agree the AI buff wasn't needed. |
i want it, both random and random allies/axis |